Channel 4 sues phone line firm over Richard and Judy quiz racket

Channel 4 is suing to try to reclaim the £1million it was forced to pay for cheating viewers in the Richard and Judy phone quiz scam.

It is taking action against Eckoh, the company which operated the premium-rate phone line, for allegedly failing to warn executives that the competition did not comply with strict guidelines.

In an investigation into the scandal exposed by The Mail on Sunday in February last year, the watchdog Ofcom accused Channel 4 of 'misconduct' and decided it had made £2.2million unfairly.

Humiliated: Richard and his wife Judy had to apologise to viewers after telling viewers there was a technical problem

It imposed a £1million fine with a further £500,000 for Noel Edmonds' quiz Deal Or No Deal, which was also ruled unfair.

It said: 'The breaches were a substantial breakdown in trust with viewers.'

Now, in a High Court writ, Channel 4 is demanding unlimited damages including repayment of the £1million, plus £300,000 to cover cancelling Richard and Judy's contest and £52,000 in viewer refunds.

Channel 4 accuses Eckoh, which was fined £150,000 by regulators over the contest, of failing to carry out a review to see if the competition complied with regulations.

The writ says that between September 2004 and February 2007, Eckoh departed from the agreed rules of the contest by submitting the shortlist of finalists before phone lines had closed.

It meant that thousands of viewers paying £1 a time to enter You Say, We Pay had no chance of winning.

Emails leaked to this paper reveal that Richard Madeley and wife Judy Finnigan, unaware of the scam, encouraged thousands to call in after potential winners had already been chosen.

The daily competition was pulled off air within hours of Channel 4 being presented with detailed allegations.

Judy told viewers it was because of a 'technical problem' but was later forced to make a humiliating apology.

Channel 4 said Eckoh admitted to the Ofcom inquiry that 'it knew the competition was being run in a non-compliant fashion but it took no steps to rectify the problems it had identified or to bring them to Channel 4's attention'.

Eckoh is on record as saying: 'We have not been contacted by Channel 4 and believe strongly that there is no basis for any legal action.

'If Channel 4 wishes to proceed with a legal action, then we will robustly defend our position.'